Bill O'Reilly Scorches Biden for Not Crushing Putin at First Mention of Nukes


It’s little surprise that the threat of nuclear weapons is being brought out as a deterrent by Russian strongman Vladimir Putin to discourage Western involvement in Ukraine. Sadly, it’s also little surprise President Joe Biden is doing little to stand up to Putin — and Bill O’Reilly is scorching him for it.

In a tweet Sunday, O’Reilly said that “Biden is in charge of crushing” Putin and that many Americans, including him, doubted Biden could do it.

The tweet caused plenty of liberal outrage — and yet, few could provide any evidence that the president was up to the task. That’s because, despite the specter of nuclear weapons being raised, the Biden White House wasn’t willing to punch back. Here at The Western Journal, we’ve been chronicling how the Biden administration’s weakness has walked the world down the primrose path to war in Ukraine. We’ll keep chronicling it — and you can help us bring America the truth by subscribing.

First, the tweet, which came after Putin announced Sunday that his country’s deterrence forces — including nuclear arms, according to CNN — were being put on high alert.

“The despicable Putin is now mentioning nukes,” O’Reilly tweeted Sunday afternoon

Facebook Being Used to Facilitate Illegal Immigrants' Infiltration of the US, from Border Crossing to Fake Work Credentials: Report

“This is a totally reprehensible and dangerous person. Joe Biden is in charge of crushing him and many Americans, including me, are concerned he’s not up to it.”

The White House scarcely responded to this. Speaking Sunday morning on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki provided the most substantive official response, saying Putin was “manufacturing threats.”


“This is really a pattern that we’ve seen from President Putin through the course of this conflict, which is manufacturing threats that don’t exist in order to justify further aggression,” she said, according to an ABC News transcript.

“And the global community and the American people should look at it through that prism. We’ve seen him do this time and time again.”

On Sunday afternoon, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations echoed that point, according to The New York Times, telling the U.N. Security Council that Russia was “under no threat” from the United States and that the move was “another escalatory and unnecessary step that threatens us all.”

“The White House made it clear that America’s own alert status had not changed,” the Times noted.

That won’t win any awards for a strenuous response — which is why the liberal Greek chorus that responded to O’Reilly’s tweet didn’t bring it up.

Facebook Being Used to Facilitate Illegal Immigrants' Infiltration of the US, from Border Crossing to Fake Work Credentials: Report

First was the rally-behind-the-president contingent of the choir:

I’m sure these people were making exactly the same argument about rallying behind former President Donald Trump during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

If that’s not a workable strategy, you can always fall back on the alternative: “Yes, but Trump…”

Forget the complete collapse of the Russiagate hoax. The idea that Donald Trump was the Muscovite Candidate is belied by one irrefutable fact: During the last four U.S. presidencies, Trump’s is the only one under which Russia didn’t invade a country.

During George W. Bush’s last year in office, Putin invaded Georgia; in 2014, under Barack Obama’s watch, Putin annexed Crimea. Now, under Biden’s presidency, he’s invading the rest of Ukraine. If Trump were Putin’s marionette, why would it make sense for him to play collect-them-all with former Soviet republics under every president since 2001 but the one the Kremlin had bought and paid for?

But wait — Trump called Putin a “genius” for the invasion, right? Well … not really:

For those who just heard the story on MSNBC or just saw it in passing, the sarcastic nature of the remark was clear when it was made during a radio interview last week. Trump made it clear that Putin’s “genius” intention was to claim part of the Ukraine was independent and that “he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper.”

“That’s the strongest peace force — we could use that on our southern border,” Trump quipped, before noting that “this never would have happened with us. Had I been in office, not even thinkable. This never would have happened.” (A vast majority of Americans agree with that statement, by the way; according to a Harvard/CAPS poll, 62 percent of respondents, including 85 percent of Republicans and even 38 percent of Democrats, thought Putin made his move because Biden was in the White House and not Trump.)

And as for the claim — not uncommon — that “Biden has rallied the world against” Putin, you’re thinking of the wrong world leader. That would be Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who made it clear from the outset of the crisis that he wasn’t decamping from Kyiv.

In fact, the United States actually requested to give him the Baby Doc/Ferdinand Marcos trip into the safe hands of foreign exile. Zelenskyy’s reported response — “I need ammunition, not a ride” — has rallied Western powers behind his cause more than any of Biden’s senescent mumblings from the White House podium.

Between all that — Biden’s weak-sauce response in the weeks preceding the invasion, his refusal to confront Putin once nukes entered into the equation and the already-existing fears that the president’s brain is in the same condition as Keith Richards’ liver — O’Reilly isn’t the only one “concerned he’s not up to it.”

When the only refutations of this in the comments section seemed to be a) that it’s high time we rally around a U.S. president whose administration has refused to put much skin in the Ukraine conflict game as of yet or that b) Trump would have let Ukraine get totally walked over, which explains why Putin … never invaded Ukraine while Trump was president, all the liberal Greek chorus is doing is convincing us Bill O’Reilly touched a very accurate nerve.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Submit a Correction →